The death has taken place after a short illness of Republican Veteran Dan Keating of Castlemaine, Co Kerry in his 106th year. Commenting on his passing the President of Republican Sinn Féin Ruairí Ó Brádaigh said:

“One of the last, if not the last IRA Veteran of the Black and Tan war, he was Patron of Republican Sinn Féin to the very day of his death and an inspiration to all true Republicans.”

RSS and atom feeds allow you to keep track of new comments on particular stories. You can input the URL's from these links into a rss reader and you will be informed whenever somebody posts a new comment. hide help

Comments (74 of 74)

I just heard the sad news that Dan Keating has died in his 105th year. Ar deis Dé go raibh a anam dílis. Patron of Sinn Féin Poblachtach, Dan joined the Republican Movement in 1915 and fought the Black and Tans in his native Kerry and into Cork and Tipp. He took the Republican side in 1922 and rejected the treaty of surrender. During the Blue Shirt era, Dan was very active in the IRA and even planned to assassinate General Eoin O'Duffy. The plan only failed because one of the ASU lost his nerve and failed to pass on vital information. In the late 1930's Dan was in the IRAs England Dept. and was in command of the England campaign in 1939. During WW2, Dan was interned in the Curragh Consentration Camp for the duration of the war. When the war of National Liberation broke out again in 1969 Dan visited his old comrade Dan Breen, who was on his deathbed. Breen passed on an automatic pistol to Dan and told him to see that "good use" was made of it.

Naturally, Dan took the Republican side in the 1969/70 split and again in 1986. Most reciently, Dan has spoken against the GFA and the playing of Garrison games in Croke Park. He was a great inspiration to all Irish Republicans and will be sorely missed. In the words of the song; Dan has gone to join that gallent band of Plunkett, Pearse and Tone. Ní bheidh a leithéad ann arís.

very sad to hear - a clear spoken conscience to all those who claim to be modern day republicans - Dan's death is a terrible loss but his example, courage and perseverance will remain a shining beacon to republicans

Sad news indeed - I fortunately had the pleasure of meeting Dan many times over the years gone by . His mind and his recollection of the times and events he lived through was razor-sharp , his commitment to a Free Ireland was as strong as ever as was his unwillingness to compromise politically on that which he held dear .
He was - and is - a great inspiration to all Irish Republicans .Ar deis Dé go raibh a anam dílis.

We are so sad to hear of the death of Dan. What a wonderful generous man he was, giving his time so generously to talk to people. We spent one of the most enjoyable afternoons in his company this year where he recalled his years in the many prisons especially the curragh. He was a wonderful Republican. His principles are an example to us all.
Ar deis Dé go raibh a anam dílis.

The above is a link to the interview Carmel Whelan conducted with Dan Keating a few months back. It's a great pity that more interviews and other conversations were'nt recorded with Dan, his death is not just a loss to his family and the Republican movement but also to historians, who for what ever reason failed to pick his brain and gather more valuable information from a man who lived through and participated in momentous historical events throughout his life.

RIP Dan.

ps: It will be intresting to see if either Adams or Martin "Milk and Water" McGuinness turn up for the funeral.

This man whod lived through and participated in so many crucial events and periods of this nations history was an asset to this nation . Despite all the setbacks and betrayals he reamined fully dedicated and indeed fully optimistic for eventual success . The states politics decreed he be ignored despite his worth to the Irish people as a whole , particularly in their understanding of themselves and the political system they live under .His death is a loss to us all .

I never met the man, but from what I've read about him, he has never veered from the path of true Republicanism. A beacon from the War of Independence has been blown out, not by the enemies of Ireland or those that serve them but by time itself.
Your time has been spent well Dan, may you rest with your comrades and may your people never forget.

I feel bound to point out that this thread is nonsense from start to finish. Dan Keating was a man who had contempt for the Irish people. Time and time again, it was made clear that the majority of people on this island had no desire to support his war of liberation. Keating determined that he knew better - and that he was entitled to fight for Irish national soverignty, whether or not the Irish people wanted it, supported it, opposed it, disagreed with it or whatever. Quite apart from the totalitarian implications of this (whats to stop any of us developing a certain mindset, and deciding that we have some God given right to launch a war on its behalf, and will impose on it our fello Irish people whatever they think of it?), it had diddly squat to do with the possible. Tactics and strategies implemented in the teeth of intense opposition from the people lead only to jail, death and destruction - not to any objective worth having. By his own reckoining, he had supported a cause and a method since 1920. That is nearly 100 years ago now. And by his own recknoning, equally, we are no further forward to achieve that goal than we were then. Could it just possibly be that any tactic of this kind that flies in the face of the people it wants to liberate has as much chance of succeeding as I do in launching a spaceship to the moon? Could it be that there is a tinyterror in his calculations? To keep advocating a course of action which fails time and time again takes us beyond the realm of principle and into the sphere of the demented.

I don't usually speak ill of the dead. In this case I will make an exception. Dan Keating was the kind of old man who tells long tales into the night, befuddles the minds of those bereft of teh ability to di9stinguish between fantasy and the real world, and ends up creating the kind of romantic delusions which causes people to end up killing for a cause that cannot be won, and suffering in prison for no good reason.

Keating wasted his life: one good thing now is that he will be in no further position to persuade others to waste theirs.

It is about time that Repoublicans left behind the gun and the bomb, the ballads for dead martyrs, and a fixation with death. How about trying to persuade the Irish people, for once and for a change, that Republicanism is worth a shot? And if you think it can't be done, leave us all alone. Most of us do not want your martyrdom any more.

"Sure we achieved nothing, the British still hold part of our country"
-Dan

In reality, they achieved plenty- and Dan had much to be proud of.

Rest in peace Dan, I was never fortunate enough to meet him over the years. We'll never fully understand what Ireland was like during those turbulent and eventful times. It really makes me sad to know that Dan, Tom Barry, Liam Mellows, Ernie O' Malley and countless others are now gone from us, and with them some tales.

Below is an example of the slave mentality that Dan devoted his life to raising the Irish people out of. Bail ó Dhia air, in life Dan was a shining beacon of freedom and hope. In death, his spirit will shine inside us. In the age of the Gombeen and the Cute Hoor, where human worth is only measured in hard cash, Dan was a humble and selfless soldier and servant of Ireland. Its no wonder RTÉ refused to take a break from interviewing Gombeens and old British soldiers, so that the Irish people could hear the words of a man who had been at the very centre of our history for nine decades, and who still looked forward to what the Irish people can yet be.

"I feel bound to point out that this thread is nonsense from start to finish. Dan Keating was a man who had contempt for the Irish people. Time and time again, it was made clear that the majority of people on this island had no desire to support his war of liberation. Keating determined that he knew better - and that he was entitled to fight for Irish national soverignty, whether or not the Irish people wanted it, supported it, opposed it, disagreed with it or whatever. Quite apart from the totalitarian implications of this (whats to stop any of us developing a certain mindset, and deciding that we have some God given right to launch a war on its behalf, and will impose on it our fello Irish people whatever they think of it?), it had diddly squat to do with the possible. Tactics and strategies implemented in the teeth of intense opposition from the people lead only to jail, death and destruction - not to any objective worth having. By his own reckoining, he had supported a cause and a method since 1920. That is nearly 100 years ago now. And by his own recknoning, equally, we are no further forward to achieve that goal than we were then. Could it just possibly be that any tactic of this kind that flies in the face of the people it wants to liberate has as much chance of succeeding as I do in launching a spaceship to the moon? Could it be that there is a tinyterror in his calculations? To keep advocating a course of action which fails time and time again takes us beyond the realm of principle and into the sphere of the demented.

I don't usually speak ill of the dead. In this case I will make an exception. Dan Keating was the kind of old man who tells long tales into the night, befuddles the minds of those bereft of teh ability to di9stinguish between fantasy and the real world, and ends up creating the kind of romantic delusions which causes people to end up killing for a cause that cannot be won, and suffering in prison for no good reason.

Keating wasted his life: one good thing now is that he will be in no further position to persuade others to waste theirs.

It is about time that Repoublicans left behind the gun and the bomb, the ballads for dead martyrs, and a fixation with death. How about trying to persuade the Irish people, for once and for a change, that Republicanism is worth a shot? And if you think it can't be done, leave us all alone. Most of us do not want your martyrdom any more."

Cael, I don't feel like a slave. I am a man who has his own opinion. And my opinion is that neither Dan Keating nor you have the right to wage a war on my behalf or that of a majority of this nation who oppose you. It is also my opinion that even if we grant you that you have this 'right', quite a stretch, anyone who wages a war when it is bitterly opposed by the majority of the people they are trying to 'liberate' is politically bonkers. The approach cannot succed - and after nearly hundred years of trying (the political equivalent of banging your head against a brick wall) it might be time to face reality on this one. What in heaven's name is the point in waging a 'war' that cannot be one? There might be a case for sacrifice in some cases, but pointless sacrifice? Sacrifice without end? Sacrifice for no good reason? Belittling thsoe who think this as 'slaves' in no way answers the point being made - but then after many years listening to Republicans I have never heard it answered.

In insisting that you can impose a settlement on the Irish people by means that they do not want, it is you who are trying to make slaves of us. As the dire poll ratings for RSF and all these groups show, 99% of the Irish people want nothing to do with it. In this instance, I am with the majority.

Dan Keating had nothing to contribute to the future. I refuse to participate in romanticising the memory of a man who, with his iron conviction that his will should over ride that of the people he claimed to champion, offered only problems rather than solutions. Ireland has had enouugh martyrs. The graveyards are full of them. It is time to live for Ireland, instead of dying for it. If Dan Keating entertained romantic fantasies to the contrary that is his right: I object to attempts by him and others however to impose this on the rest of us.

"if German forces should land in Ireland, they will land as friends and liberators of the Irish people"
(IRA Statement 1940)

- do people really regard this as the true path of republicanism? Is Keating's status not based on his involvement in the republican movement at this time? (ie he stuck to the 'true path', never wavered, etc). Given this history, in what light should we put on his statements in the interview linked to above, concerning Hitler building Germany up from the ruins and saving Spain from communism.
Are these kind of views prevalent in Republican Sinn Fein? Does Republican Sinn Fein stand over the Second World War record of the IRA?

Sten, Didn't the O'Neills seek to land the Spanish, enemies of the English?
Didn't the United Irishmen seek to land the French, enemies of the English?
Didn't Pearse and the Men and women of 1916 see the war with Germany as the opportune moment to rise up against Britannia?
Like the IRA during the 2nd World War those before them chose to enlist the aid of Britain's enemies to free Ireland.
We all know about Hitler and the Nazis, but are you tarring all the German people with the same brush?
What I ask you is the difference between Hitler and Bush invading other peoples countries, trying to destroy their culture while stealing their wealth?

Observer, if people like you just had the courage to step outside of British law in into the Law of the Irish Republic its extremely unlikely that the British would put up much of a fight at this time. But, by you believing that it cant be done, the Brits know they have bought off many and frightened the rest into submission. Whats exceptional about Dan was that he lived every day of his life by the Law of the Republic and never once submitted to British imposed partitionist assemblies. Why would the Brits bother building a prison for you, when you do it so well for your self?

Cael, you comprehesnsvely miss the point. You advocate a course of action (war) against the wishes of the people you are trying to liberate. In my view, this is crazy by itself - but let us grant for the sake of argument that you and Old Dan Keating somehow have the right to over-ride the wishes of the Irish people. The key unanswered question remains: not in a million years, not with a thousand deaths, not with any sacrifice you care to name, can a military campaign founded on this basis ever achieve its goals. Your own record shows the quest is impossible. Now, you may berate the way that people like me think of this; you may moan that we are, in effect, colluding with the British ( a remarkably contemptuous attitude, by the way, towards your own people - evidently, we are all fools for not appreciating the quality of your insights). But bluster as you may, the facts remain: you cannot succeed on this basis. Thus, no point to sacrifice. If your co-thinkers spent less time either dying fdr Irelabnd or fantasising about it, and more time living; less time ranting that the Irish poeople are fools, and a bit more time trying to persuade them of your point of view (which, incidentally, means engaging with their arguments rather than denouncing them - its called politics) you might be better off. Or again not.

Onto PH - the United Irehmen etc were prepared to welcome a French invasion, so what's the problem with the IRA welcoming in the Nazis? This is quite mad. It shows that the traditional Republican antipathy to Britain over-rides common sense, and even the instinct for self preservation. The Nazis were a phenomemon unique in history - the Holocaust, the genocide, the totalitarianism. Rather different from the French Revolution! By putting collaboration with swine like that above everything else you show no sense of proprotion at all - which is, I repeat, a major reason why 99% of the Irish people want nothing to do with your war and your cause. You have discredited it.

And without that support, you will be going nowhere. Dan Keating was a voice from the past - his death is a personal loss to his family, but it is no loss to the Irish people.

"Like the IRA during the 2nd World War those before them chose to enlist the aid of Britain's enemies to free Ireland."

So let us get this straight, a German landing and subsequent occupation in 1940 would mean a "free Ireland". Free of what? Jews?

"We all know about Hitler and the Nazis, but are you tarring all the German people with the same brush?"

Keating and company were allied with, and showing considerable political sympathy to, the National Socialist German Workers Party aka Nazi, regime, then in power in Berlin, some hitherto unknown homogenous "German people" doesn't come into it (Keating and the IRA of the period clearly were not thinking of the many Germans in the concentration camps - which incidentally had a majoritiy German inmate population until 1942). BTW what do "we all know" about the Nazis, that they were great lads that provided employment and saved Spain for mother Church? That is the ballpark Keating was in with the interview linked to above.

"What I ask you is the difference between Hitler and Bush invading other peoples countries, trying to destroy their culture while stealing their wealth?"

So what you are telling me is in the unlikely event of an imperialist conflict, or perhaps just a rivalry, between Washington and London, republicans would align themselves with Washington, even to the extent of supporting an Iraq style invasion and occupation of Ireland, in the interests of "freeing Ireland". Is it that republicanism is so bankrupt it cannot even be expected to manage to not ally itself with George Bush? You choose what you are doing in relation to whether or not it compares to the current American government? We will not get into bed with anyone worse than Bush - nice moral standards those! (it is also nonsense - while the occupation of Iraq is horrendous it doesn't compare at all with what was going on in Poland, Russia, etc..).

And y'know that doesn't even begin to compare with what Keating and the IRA of 1940 were doing, they were (a) clearly politically sympathetic to the then German government and (b) willing to facilitate a German invasion of Ireland.

Either national socialism, or some other variant on Fascism, represents freedom, and is so wonderful that one can do a 180 degree u-turn and welcome invasion and domination, or it most certainly doesn't, and collaborating with Hitler was stone crazy.

If Republican Sinn Fein can't manage to figure that one out I don't know what it says about them.

Dan thought that the Irish nation should have no section occupied by a foriegn power and that the Irish people acting as a whole should be allowed to determine their fate. For this observer begrudges him. For a free ireland, a new ireland. eire nua.

So Observer and Sten are saying that the IRA were aware of what the Nazis were doing in 1940 while seemingly the British and Americans weren't until they came upon the concentration camps during the final stages of the war.
Didn't the Americans give refuge to some of the Nazi scientists after the war?
If Dan was so supportive of the Nazis then why did he try to assassinate the Blue Shirt Eoin O Duffy?

Either what I have said is ignored (understandable, since Republicans have nothing to say...) or misrepresented. thus for examnple :'Dan thought that the Irish nation should have no section occupied by a foriegn power and that the Irish people acting as a whole should be allowed to determine their fate. For this observer begrudges him. For a free ireland, a new ireland. eire nua.'

I don't begrude Keating this at all - he was completely entitled to this view. Everyone is entitled to harbour whatever opinion they wish, however nonsensical it is. What I do begrudge is his view that a war should be waged to achieve this against and in defiance of the express wishes of the Irish people. Is this so hard to understand?? It is a very different thing. If you believe in Irish sovereignty then to my mind it follows that the Irish people's wishes should be respected as regards to the means as well as the ends. Without that, your advocacy of war is a grotesque insult to the Irish people (who are dismissed as idiots, too stupid to know what is good for them), it is totalitarian, it is undemocratic, and moreover something completely incaopable of achieving its goals. You cannotwin your aims by these methods when most Irish people oppose you - it is that simple. They are therefore pointless and counter productive. No number of Rebel songs can drown out the din of failure that surrounds your proiject. How about an answer to the point, rather than avoidance? You need to persuade people of your point of view, not ram it down their throat at the point of a gun. Dan Keating was an anachronism, and most Irish people have nothing but contempt for his methods.

As to the Nazis: it is a secondary point, and beongs to Sten rather than me. It is however clear that Republicans are ambivalent on the issue. I have known more than one 'old republican' make admiring comments about Hitler - 'the only man who ever nearly beat Hitler' etc. It remains a blot on the Republican record, and bluster will not remove it.

In regard to knowledge, clearly some republicans knew, because in the 1930s An Phoblacht took an anti-fascist line:

"An Phoblacht reviewed the Brown Book of the Hitler Terror and
explained how under Nazism 'Jews are murdered or hounded' and 'bloody
coercion' imposed on the German people. That the Nazis had banned
rival political parties, murdered socialists and jailed thousands of
their opponents was taken as evidence that the 'Fascist state is a
collection of human chattels at the disposal of tyrants'. Reports from
the underground German Social Democratic Party were also published in
the paper. Therefore any IRA member who cared to read his own
organisation's newspaper during those years would have been aware of
the nature of Nazi Germany. Part of the key to understanding the
pro-Nazi drift of the IRA in 1940 is the nature of the political
struggles within the organisation during the previous decade."
(from 'The IRA and Nazism')

Later however a different faction comes to prominence, under whose auspices the bombing campaign in England (in which Keating was apparently important), was carried on:

"However, in July 1940 the IRA leadership issued a statement outlining
its position on the war. The statement made clear that if 'German
forces should land in Ireland, they will land...as friends and
liberators of the Irish people'. The public was assured that Germany
desired neither 'territory nor...economic penetration' in Ireland but
only that it should play its part in the 'reconstruction' of a 'free
and progressive Europe'. The Third Reich was also praised as the
'energising force' of European politics and the 'guardian' of national
freedom. In response to critics such as George Bernard Shaw, who had
drawn attention to Hitler's anti-Catholic policies, the IRA countered
that both 'Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini' proved their lack of bias
by helping to establish the 'Catholic government' of Franco in Spain.
In August the IRA confidently predicted that with the assistance of
'our victorious European allies' Ireland would 'achieve absolute
independence within the next few months'."

"During 1940 IRA officers approached O'Duffy and asked him to become an
intelligence operative for the organisation. Irish Freedom noted with
disgust how the Nazis seemed to have been able to 'corrupt' some of
the leading Irish republicans."

(if attitude to O'Duffy is a determinant of attitude to fascism, and unrelated to civil war politics, it follows then....)

"That this was the case became more apparent over the next year. War
News, the IRA's main publication, became increasingly pro-Nazi in
tone, even claiming active IRA involvement in the German bombing of
British cities. But more chillingly it began to ape anti-Semitic
arguments. Satisfaction was expressed that the 'cleansing fire' of the
German armies was driving the Jews from Europe. British war minister
Hore Belisha was described as a 'wealthy Jew' only interested in
'profits'. War News condemned the arrival in Ireland of 'so-called
Jewish refugees', along with unspecified numbers of 'Albanian,
Abyssinian, Mongolian [and] Tartars'. These new arrivals were not only
supposedly putting Irish people out of work but also exploiting those
that they employed. Belfast was said to be increasingly in the 'hands
of international Jewry' because of this influx. 'The Jews', War News
warned, were 'like the English, when they are strong they bully and
rule.' In Dublin de Valera's government was also dominated by 'Jews
and Freemasons' who were becoming the 'new owners of Ireland'. Fianna
Fáil TD Robert Briscoe was singled out for attack."
(also from 'the IRA and Nazism')

We then have, in an interview linked to above, posted on indymedia a couple of months ago, Keating, in response to a question something along the lines of well of course you didn't support the nazis so did you get involved in this alliance, came out with fullsome praise for Adolf Hitler, to the effect he lifted Germany up from the ruins and but for the war would have been canonised for saving Spain from communism.

The worrying thing is the fact that this man's career and viewpoints are praised as consistent republicanism.
If he wasn't being held up as an example, and having his virtues extolled, for instance as patron of Republican Sinn Fein, no one would be interested.

A great Kerryman and a true Irish hero and patriot. Dan is an inspiration to all Republicans. Somehow, his long and healthy life seems like a just reward for his lifetime of dedication to the cause of Irish freedom. Even though there were political differences in recent times I sincerely hope that the SF and RSF leadership will come together to pay respects to this warrior for the Irish people.

With respect to the the poster above, i hope the PSF leadership have the decency to stay well away from the funeral of Dan Keating, he clearly had no time for groups who kill republicans in the name of partition, indeed he fought a civil war against people such as Gerry Adams.

It was only a matter ot time before nameless trolls came on besmirching Dan's name. is the man even dead 24 hours yet? The same thing happenned when the death of Micheal O'Riordan was announced on this site along with various others. This is probally the same reason why our generation sits back and makes snide remarks while Dan's actually took a stand for a belief. Dan was not a Communist (though he was a member of the Barmans Union for years and also fought the blueshirts) he was also not a fascist (though he wanted to use the Axis powers to "free" Ireland). He was and will forever be an Irish Republican following in the footsteps of Plunkett, Pearse and Ashe and anyone else who died in the name of Irish Freedom.

Did anyone who has a problem with Dan ever decide to meet him face to face to discuss their differing viewpoints?

On another point the death of Tony Ryan's made all the News bullettins and papers while Dan's made none but this site. Did the last vetran of the War of Independence not at least deserve a couple of seconds?

I saw him once on TG4 and was trilled to see a man with fire in his belly at that age. Simply inspiring. R.I.P
He is one of a long list of ignored Irish men who stood their ground when most of us would not.

DAN Keating was born in 1902 in the townland of Ballygamboon, Castlemaine, Co Kerry. In 1917, Dan went to work in Tralee at Jerry McSweeney's Grocery, Bar and Bakery. Jerry McSweeney's uncle, Richard Laide, was shot in the attack on Gortalea barracks which was the first barracks to be attacked in Ireland.

Dan joined the Fianna in Tralee in 1918 and about two years later he joined the Irish Republican Army. Others to join at that time were Gerry Moyles, Donnchadh Donoghue, Tommy Vale, John Riordan (Kerry All-Ireland footballer), Jerry O'Connor (better known as "Uncy"), Matt Moroney and Paddy and Billy Griffin.

In the meantime Dan met a soldier who used to frequent the bar where he worked and during conversations procured a rifle from him. This was then handed over to Johnny O'Connor of the Farmers' Bridge unit. Dan was later to join this unit which included men of the calibre of Johnny Duggan, Johnny O'Connor, Timmy Galvin, Moss Galvin, Jack Corkery, Jim Ryle, Mick Hogan and Jamesy Whiston. This unit was very active from 1920 to 1924 and many of its members took part in the Headford ambush which claimed the lives of approximately 20 British soldiers. Volunteers Danny Allman and Jimmy Baily also lost their lives at Headford.

Dan took part in the ambush at Castlemaine in which eight RIC and Black-and-Tans were killed. Gerry Moyles was severely injured in this encounter. The last ambush in Kerry took place in Castleisland on the night before the Truce and Dan also participated in this. Four RIC members were killed in this action and Volunteers Jack Shanahan, Jack Prenderville, John McMahon and John Flynn also lost their lives.

In 1922 Dan was transferred to a unit in Tralee which was commanded by Tommy Barton of Ballyroe when they occupied Ballymullen barracks for a period of three months. Dan took part in the attack on Listowel barracks, now occupied by the Free Staters, in which one Free Stater was shot dead.
In Limerick, Dan, along with comrades from Kerry, fought the Free State troops over a period of ten days. Republican Volunteers Patrick Foran, Charlie O'Hanlon and Tom McLoughlin lost their lives there, Dan was then sent to Tipperary to instruct Gerry Moyles to return to Kilmallock but on the way they were surrounded by Free Staters. After a battle at Two Mile Bridge Dan and his comrades were taken prisoner and held in Thurles barracks for two days before being conveyed to Portlaoise jail where he was held for six months. This was to be the first of many times Dan was interned by the Free State.

During this period in Portlaoise the jail was burned and Volunteer Paddy Hickey from Dublin was shot dead. Dan was then transferred to the Curragh Internment Camp and was held there until March 1923. a Free State soldier named Bergin from Nenagh, who became friendly with the Republican prisoners and acted as a courier to Republicans on the outside, was executed by the Staters.

Dan was charged with possession of a shotgun in 1930 and was issued a summons but did not attend court and was fined £1. In the true Republican tradition he refused to pay and was sent to Limerick and held for one week. During a court case in Tralee involving Johnny O'Connor and Mick Kennedy, in which they refused to recognise the court, their supporters in the courthouse cheered loudly and when things died down the judge ordered Dan Keating to be brought up before him and gave him three months for contempt. Dan was jailed in Cork with Johnny O'Connor but after a hunger strike by Johnny both were released after three weeks.

The next time Dan was interned was after O'Duffy's visit to Tralee; he was sentenced to six months in Arbour Hill. Dan was later captured in Carrigans in Clonmel by a policeman who had previously arrested him in Tralee and was taken first to Thurles and from there to the Curragh where he was held for three years and six months. In this period the camp was the camp was burned and Barney Casey from Longford was shot dead.

Dan was also on active service in England during the early 1940s.

Dan returned to work in Dublin and operated as a barman in the Eagle House, James Street, the Cornet and the Kilmardenny public houses.

Dan's other great interest was Gaelic games, and indeed between football and hurling he has attended more than 140 All-Ireland senior finals including replays, which must be a record in itself. When Dan retired he returned to Kerry in 1978 and resided at Ballygamboon, Castlemaine.

In 2004 Dan Keating replaced George Harrison of Mayo and New York as the fourth Patron of Sinn Féin Poblachtach since 1986, following in the footsteps of such illustrious Republicans ad Comdt-General Tom Maguire and Michael Flannery of Tipperary and New York.

During his long, healthy and adventurous lifetime Dan has seen many splits and deviations from Republican principles, but he remained loyal and true to the end.

Dan Keating died in Tralee on October 2, 2007, after a short illness. I measc Laochra na nGael go raibh sé

A bit petty to use a few quotes from 1940 to attack an old man who has just died.

There have been many people on the left who died over the years - including members of the republican movement - who could equally be said to have supported Stalin. People tend not to score points on these things when someone has just died.

So the IRA are deemed to have collaborated with Nazi Germany because of a newspaper article while not a mention of the beloved Brit masters who collaborated with Nazi Germany to dismember Czechoslovakia, helped ship Franco and his scum from north Africa to Spain and then enforced an arms embargo against the Spanish republic all the while the fascists were being armed to the teeth by Italy and Germany.

Earlier, PH tried to argue that it was ok to welcome in the Nazis to 'free Ireland' because the United Irishmen were willing to welcome the French. Hence collaboration with the Nazis was ok - they were after all England's enemy. Does this reflect the view of Republican Sinn Fein or does it not? Normally, you are very willing to yap about your version of history, but seem keen to maintain an uncharacteristic and stoic silence on this point. Come clean. Have the decency to spell out your view and defend it, whatever it is.

As to whether it is decent to raise these and other issues when a man has died - this is spurious. RSF is using his life and death as an example, and thereby making a political point out of it. They are using it to try and recruit more people, who presumably will be encouraged to resume their 'war' once more, irrespective of the veiws of the Irish people, and despite the very obvious fact that it has not one whit of a chance of success. They have turned his death into a political rather than personal issue. It is scarcely surprising therefore that those who despite the dreadful legacy of Keating and his ilk have something to say about it.

Non-Republican, where exactly have I argued that it was ok to welcome the Nazis to free Ireland? Go back and read both pieces again.
What I said was, that like the Generations before them the IRA chose to enlist the aid of aid of Britain's enemies and that I found it incredible that they would have known about the Nazi extermination camps if the Allies didn't.
People point to the Nazis and Stalin but they seem to be blind to the so called good guys of Britain and the US, whose history is littered with mass murder, oppression and plunder. Dropping an Atomic bomb and incinerating entire cities is ok if your a 'Good Guy'.
This argument has blown it's coarse so I'll leave it there.

"Dan returned to work in Dublin and operated as a barman in the Eagle House, James Street, the Cornet and the Kilmardenny public houses. "

Can anyone confirm this? That Dan worked in the comet (this should be comet not cornet I believe) and the Kilmardenny. I'm a big history fan and have had many heated discussions about various books, programmes, peoples, battles etc. about Irelands struggle for freedom in these very same pubs which are my locals, I had no idea that a vet had once worked in them. Can anyone elaborate on this, what time periods are we talking about here. I've seen 50 years working in the comet as a barmen mentioned, surely this cannot be correct? Any further information on Dans barman career in North Dublin in very very much appreciated.

Ph actually wrote earlier as follows: 'Didn't the O'Neills seek to land the Spanish, enemies of the English?
Didn't the United Irishmen seek to land the French, enemies of the English?
Didn't Pearse and the Men and women of 1916 see the war with Germany as the opportune moment to rise up against Britannia?
Like the IRA during the 2nd World War those before them chose to enlist the aid of Britain's enemies to free Ireland.'

Now, to any normal way of reading, this means that it was ok to welcome in the Nazis, since they were on 'our' side against the English. PH's little denials are not convincing.

PH then wriggles some more - sure how could the IRA have known about the death camps if the Allies themselves did not? God spare us. In 1940, even if the details of the death camps were (relatively) unknown, Nazism had been in power since 1933; there had been a civil war in Spain; the horror of the Naqzi programme had been spelled out in black and white, not least by Hitler himself in Mein Kampf. Only someone wilfully blind could have failed to see that the world here faced something unprecedented in its history, something appallingly barbaric that had to be stopped at all costs. And the world was full of millions who saw just that - sad to say, the leadership of the IRA were not amongst them. And only a political idiot, after the Nazi invasions of many countries, could have imagined that a Nazi invasion of Ireland would have been the prelude to liberty.

This was a disgusting period in Republican history, betraying such a hatred of the English that blind passion over-rode everything else.

So what would your opinion be of IRish republicans who previously sought the aid of Lenin and Trotsky (in 1919/20) and of Uncle Joe in the 20s and 30s. Are they similarly repulsive and "disgusting". (Use of latter word actually provides a large clue to your own political orientation!!)

Historian seems to be suggesting that since other Republicans sought the aid of Stalin, then it was equally ok to seek aid from the Nazis. He is ducking and weaving so much around the issue it is hard to be sure. Be straight about it. Was it a good idea to hook up with the Nazis and suggest that a Nazi invasion would free Ireland - or was it not? Was it a good idea to imagine that a Nazi victory over the Allies might have had an upside for Irish freedom - or was it not?

I have no truck with Stalinism or Leninism and would have nothing to do with them either. However, it at least has to be said that nobody who did entertain those illusions actually thought a Russian invasion of Ireland might be a good thing (and no such invasion, so far as I know was ever in prospect. Whereas a Nazi invasion of Ireland and England was a very real possibility). The IRA of 1940 evidently thought Hitler had his upsides. Dan Keating thought so. And so it appears does historian.....

It rather suggests that many RSF members are so blinded by their anti-English venom that their whoel world view is distorted.

Do I understand why republicans thought that getting arms from them might have been? Yes.

Just as I understand why republicans - some of them the same individuals (Russell for example) thought that hooking up with Stalin was a good idea. Again something I would not agree with.

My point was that it was dishonest to castigate Dan Keating over this issue when he couldn't possibly have know the reality of Nazism. No more persumably than other republicans knew of the equaly horror of what was going on in the USSR. Indeed people who have died recently and who remained supporters of the USSR up to the very end and who had less excuse than Keating given that they couldn't possibly not have known what Stalin was responsible for, are regarded as heroes. Not by yourself perhaps.

Historian, you are allowing yourself to be drawn into Anti-Republicans rants about the IRA and Nazis. He / She ignores valid points about the history of the English and the US in other countries and their own actions during WW2. The fact is their record is no better than the Nazis nor Stalin.
The good guys according to A-R are justified in slaughtering women and children in Japan, Vietnam, Iraq or countless other countries in the world because according to them they are the 'Free World'.
Don't forget that WW2 was practically over when they dropped the bombs on Japan.

(1) The IRA drew up a so-called "Plan Kathleen" for joint operations with an invading German force.
They were actually trying to encourge a German invasion.

(2) All this about seeking aid from Germany was in the context that IRA operations in either the North or in Britain would aid, in however small a way, the Axis war effort.

- At this time German military forces were in Calais - for all the world knew poised to make an air and sea landing in Britain (and at least part of Ireland).

We could say this was "England's difficulty, Ireland's opportunity" (which is a VERY problematic concept anyways) but we might also note the fact the IRA was activily making pro-Nazi and anti-semitic propaganda at the time.

At no stage has a Russian force in anyways been in a similar situation as Nazi Germany was in 1940, when really the issue of active collaboration arises, as opposed to an issue of a rose tinted glasses view of a foreign country.

The role in regards to the internal politics of a country played by Stalin sympathisers, in comparision to that played by Fascist sympathisers tends to be somewhat different, in a context where neither is in power or likely to be giving active assitance to a foreign invasion.

This then is partly an issue of where Repubican Sinn Fein would be located on the political spectrum today.

In regard to 1940 the reasons that such a situation did not come to pass, that there wasn't a German invasion of Ireland, is mostly down to (a) the German government (greater interest in prosecuting a war with the Soviet Union by comparision with the one against the British Empire) and (b) the British military.

Had what the IRA were looking for, to the best of their limited abilities, came to pass then Ireland circa 1942 would have, in the least, resembled France in 1942. With the then IRA membership playing the role played by Breton, Flemish, or Croat nationalists elsewhere, a minor volk in the European new order. In the British case at least the IRA's allies in Berlin already had the list of who was for the first round up before they were to land. No "the legitimate government of Ireland" shouldn't be free from criticism.

In regard to the recent death of Dan Keating - this is already politicised by RSF, and yeah I'm pretty low on sympathy, I wouldn't expect outpourings of condolences on indymedia uk on the death of a member of the British Free Corps, or on indymedia belguim on the death of a member of the Wallonische Legion, or on any of the indymedias in the Spanish state on the death of someone who hailed Hitler as Spain's saviour, certainly not if such a person was being extolled by a contemporary political group, based parly on their wartime service record. Around here it seems so long as it waves white organge and green its ok.

I rather fear that Patrick Henry is imbiding some magic mushrooms of a particular strength and potency. I never once mentioned atom bombs, defended US Imperialism, justified British policy anywhere, Vietnam or anything else. Nor did I suggest that Nazism was the only evil in the world - PH, I note, provides no ta single quotation from me to back up his assertions. (Why let facts get in teh way of a good theory?) We weren't discussing these issues. We were discussing PH's view that the IRA wheeze of inviting the Nazis to invade Ireland would facilitate the liberation of the country was quiet a nifty idea. To evade this, PH is playing a particularly disengenuous game of 'whataboutery.' Yes - but what about Vietnam? Yes, well what about the new Indiana Jones movie as well? It has an equal relecvance to the topic at hand. Let us agree on the perfidity of US policy in Vietnam (though what this has to do with the issue, I don't know). I can only infer that PH wants to defend Sean Russell and the IRA's policy of collaborating with the Nazis in 1940, rather than admit it was a mistake. Such a view, such a tendency to whitewash all aspect of your movement's history, shows such a chronic inability to face facts that it is among the reasons why most Irish people have no interest in you.

Historian: "My point was that it was dishonest to castigate Dan Keating over this issue when he couldn't possibly have know the reality of Nazism."

But in the 1930s An Phoblacht took this line:

"An Phoblacht reviewed the Brown Book of the Hitler Terror and
explained how under Nazism 'Jews are murdered or hounded' and 'bloody
coercion' imposed on the German people. That the Nazis had banned
rival political parties, murdered socialists and jailed thousands of
their opponents was taken as evidence that the 'Fascist state is a
collection of human chattels at the disposal of tyrants'. Reports from
the underground German Social Democratic Party were also published in
the paper. Therefore any IRA member who cared to read his own
organisation's newspaper during those years would have been aware of
the nature of Nazi Germany. Part of the key to understanding the
pro-Nazi drift of the IRA in 1940 is the nature of the political
struggles within the organisation during the previous decade."
(from 'The IRA and Nazism')

Incidentally the statue to Sean Russell (then IRA chief of staff) in Fairview was put up in the 1950s - republican propaganda at the time makes clear he was being honoured for his wartime role and relationship with Nazi Germany.
There are still republican commemorations at this monument.
To my knowledge the role played by the IRA in inviting a German invasion has never been questioned by Republican Sinn Fein, in fact here they are praising that role in the above thread, and this is a group which bases itself a lot around legitimacy and tradition and the fact they are in a 'continuity' with the IRA of times past, including that of 1940.

Finally on Dan Keating he was interviewed a couple of months ago - the interview was posted on this site - and in it he is praising Hitler.

When I refer to the reality of Nazism I am talking of the Holocaust and the murder of millions of people in camps. No-one knew anything about that in the 1930s - because it hadn't happened yet, OR in 1940 for that matter.

Nazi Germany was a nasty place in 1937 so was Stalin's Soviet Union. Far worse in face in that they had already had murdered millions. So by your reckoning people on the left, including the IRA, who sought aid from Stalin or who joined the CP were just as culpable as Dan Keating. Would you describe Michael O'Riordan as a collaborator with the murderers of the Gulag?

"Would you describe Michael O'Riordan as a collaborator with the murderers of the Gulag?"

If the Red Army was in France, ostensibly about to invade Britain, and Michael O'Riordan was trying to get them to include Ireland on their list of destinations, then certainly yes. I'm not aware of any such situation having come to pass. What other description would there be?

Of course what does it say about an apparently "anti-imperialist force" if the choices it has to make are which imperialist power to ally with.
Even if Berlin or Moscow were not as bad as they were, it seems a funny "anti-imperialism" that seeks to replace London with Berlin or Mosocw (or Washington). Likewise the whataboutery seems to suggest that either republican anti-imperialism should be expect to behave the same as british imperialism (on a much smaller scale) or to ally itself with whatever imperialism (America being as bad as Germany etc..etc...)

Also as pointed out above, whatever about views on far away places, the role played in internal politics by Stain sympathisers and by fascist sympathisers tends to be different (in a context of being out of power and with no prospect of a foreign invasion). This is why anti-Stalinist leftists might be involved in anti-fash groups, but you don't find direct action against the remanents of this or that Stalinist or Maoist group being high on anyones agenda!

I interviewed Dan Keating in February of this year. It was an amazing experience. He was an intelligent, quick witted man with an astounding memory. He was incredibly generous with both his time and his knowledge. May he rest in peace.

sickened by the lack of coverage this recieved in the maintream media.

'We sent our vision aswim like a swan on the river
the vision became a reality
Winter became Summer
bondage became freedom
and we left it to you as your inheritage
O generations of freedom remember us
the generations of the vision '

Unlike the 26 county broadcaster who didnt feel that the last survivor of the tan war, a man who stayed true to principle his long life wasnt due mention the BBC did a lengthy piece on Dan in which this was included:

"Working in the Comet Bar in Dublin's northside, he was an active trade unionist in the bar worker's union.

A non-drinker until his 50s, he took his first drink after a row with the teetotal Pioneer Total Abstinence Association whose pin he had sported as a lifelong member.

At a consultation meeting called by the government to relax pub opening hours, Dan was shocked when the teetotal organisation backed plans to lengthen pub opening hours in opposition to the barworkers' union.

His response was typically militant.

"I took the pin off and fired it at them. I walked out of the meeting with the union leader Walter Byrne, and both of us had a glass of sherry," he said."

Apart from the deeds attributed to Dan, i was particularly impressed to read how refused to accept his pension from the Free State government. this is made all the more impressive when one learns of the huge expenses accounts that out "republican" MLA's accept in Stormont. It is a damn pity that they were not more like Dan.

I always met Dan , and others , on average about three times each year , at various RSF events - Ard Fheis , Bundoran , different commemorations and rally's etc , and I can honestly say that there are dozens of others I would meet - often introduced to them by Dan himself - that are of the same calibre of the late Mr Keating .

Men and women , all younger in years , with the same political determination - all , like Dan , completely at peace and at ease with their political position . I owe Dan 'big time' for introducing me to those people , whom I will continue to keep in contact with .
I'll miss the man .

just adding my condolences to those close to Dan, rest in peace- braver than most, the fact Tony Ryan gets called "one of the greatest Irishmen of his time" and this man forgotten says everything about modern Ireland.

Oration delivered by Ruairí Ó Brádaigh, President Republican Sinn Féin at the funeral of Republican Veteran and Patron of Republican Sinn Féin Dan Keating in Co. Kerry on Friday October 5.

"We stand by Dan Keating s grave in all humility, for this was an Irishman and a Kerryman who gave more than 90 years of service to the All-Ireland Republic of 1916 and the First (All-Ireland) Dáil. But we are fiercely proud of his long lifetime of service.

For more than four score and ten years since he first took the Oath of Allegiance to that Republic, Dan fought in defence of it, stood by it and adhered faithfully to it until his death last October 2 at the great age of 105 years. He was an inspiration to succeeding generations of Republicans, never deviating from the hard road of service and suffering, striving to place All Ireland and its future in the hands of the Irish people.

Uinseann Mac Eoin, in his book The IRA in the Twilight Years1923-48, published in 1997, gives us a glimpse of Dan Keating:

A man who has travelled to almost every All-Ireland final in Croke Park and whose fighting goes back into Tan times.

Tall and spare, at more than 90 years of age he is not stooped, carrying himself with an easy grace; his face soft, not weather beaten. Yet he has spent much of his life standing, having been a barman, in a string of public houses in Dublin; for a number of years in London, and then back again in Dublin, two cities that are well known to him.

Dan joined Fianna Eireann at the end of1916 and went on two years later to enrol in the ranks of the Irish Republican Army, first with Kerry No 1 Brigade, and later with Kerry No 2 under its Brigade O/C, John Joe Rice. His combat duty included the highly successful ambush of British forces in his native Castlemaine in1921. Later he saw service in the Castleisland ambush where casualties were also inflicted on the occupation forces, but four of his Volunteer comrades were also killed in action.

Following the Treaty of Surrender, Dan fought against Free State forces in Limerick and Tipperary before being captured and interned in Portlaoise jail and later in Tintown Camp on the Curragh.
Released in 1924, he was back in harness in the Republican Cause.

He endured several short terms of imprisonment in the 1930s, before going to England to take part in the 1939-40 Sabotage Campaign there. He soldiered alongside Sean McNeela of Mayo, JJ Reynolds of Leitrim and Richard Goss of Dundalk.

Back in Ireland, Dan was interned without trial at the Curragh 1940-44. A Republican leader whom he met at that time and respected greatly was George Plant of Tipperary. The re-organisation of the Republican Movement afterwards was long and difficult. Larry Grogan of Drogheda, Frank Driver of Kildare and Mick McCarthy of Cork were men he looked up to.

When he retired from work and settled in his native Co Kerry in 1978, Dan threw himself into local Republican activity. In 2004, he was elected by the Ard-Fheis of Republican Sinn Féin to be its Patron. This was in succession to Comdt-Gen Tom Maguire of Mayo, Michael Flannery of Tipperary and New York and George Harrison of Mayo and New York.

Dan Keating attended and spoke at Ard-Fheiseanna, gave interviews to newspapers, and on radio.He was at all times very clear as to what was required: Ireland was one country, one nation and one people. The English government had no right to be in any part of Ireland; they must go and then the Irish people, acting as a unit, would decide their own future. He accepted that this would be best resolved through a four-province federation, as proposed by Republican Sinn Féin, under one over-arching national parliament.

When he was chosen as Munster Honoree at the annual dinner of CABHAIR (the Prisoners Dependants Fund organisers) some years ago the citation included the following:

Dan' s other great interest is Gaelic games, and indeed between football and hurling he has attended over 138 All-Ireland senior finals, including replays, which must be a record in itself. He now resides at Ballygamboon, Castlemaine.

During his long, healthy and adventurous lifetime, Dan has seen many splits and deviations from Republican principles, but he had remained loyal and true, and there is no more fitting recipient of this honour than this noble son of Kerry.

Dan Keating regarded the so-called peace process as a surrender process and would not accept any British government presence in Ireland, regardless of how it was presented to the Irish people.

Long may his ideals live in the hearts of the Kerry people he loved and the Irish people to whom he gave a lifetime of service.

I have read this thread through curiosity and interest, having recently commemorated my grandfather, who died at the same age around this time last year. Both men were the only surviving veterans of the War of Independence for a good while. Although some of their views were diametrically opposed, they were united on the one thing: both regarded themselves as Irish Republicans who aspired to a thirty-two county State, even still. They may have disagreed very profoundly on the appropriate methodology with which to achieve this aim once the War of Independence was over, and subsequently, but they had the same basic long-term hope in terms of outcome.

I think there is a lot of confused, unbalanced commentary on this thread that conflates what the word 'Republican' meant to an older generation with what it means to a younger one, with the latter immediately assuming it generally means armed struggle. As a pacifist to all intents and purposes, I have a problem with this. So did my grandfather, but for other reasons, having participated in two major armed struggles himself and understood first hand the costs involved.

I am dismayed by the comments from 'Observer', particularly the following one: 'Keating wasted his life: one good thing now is that he will be in no further position to persuade others to waste theirs.'
While I, too, disagreed with many of Dan Keating's views, I also think it's incredibly ungracious to make a statement such as the above about a 105-year-old man who fought the forces of imperialism on behalf of the people of his country. It shows a huge lack of decency, not to mention decorum.

The fact that Keating's views did not change or moderate with changing and more moderate political circumstances is a fact that some may find regrettable. But there is no way his life was wasted. 'Observer' points to Keating's lack of balance, while using very unbalanced language and sentiments to do so, a contradiction in itself. I know this is a feature of Indymedia, given the fact that anyone can post on it. But the statement 'I don't usually speak ill of the dead' is a bit rich coming from someone who can speak ill of a man who has lived for over a century and seen and experienced things that you or I may never have to see or experience.

As has been pointed out, the State pitifully refused to recognise Keating's status as a veteran of the War of Independence. Having said that, he refused to recognise the State, so I suppose there was no love lost there and it was a two-way thing. You have to admire the man's stubborn determination, whether you agree or disagree with his position.

Another statement I object to is the following:
'Many of the people who say that the IRA were Nazis might not remember that their Fine Gael grand parents were cheering on the Blue Shirts.'
My response to this particular statement is to say that there are those of us who would never accuse the IRA of having been Nazis (the attempted collaboration was a highly regrettable form of realpolitik), but whose Fine Gael grandparents actually also really profoundly disliked the Blueshirts and saw them as a dreadful nuisance - and would most probably fully understand why Keating would wish to do away with O'Duffy. An old man who fought for Ireland has passed away; his life was valuable because it was a life, firstly, and secondly, because Keating had many admirable characteristics, whether his overall political stance was palatable to you or not.

The older generation got over the sectarianism, largely, and got on with their lives, not to mention industriously going about building the country through times of great economic difficulty. It's time to move on, folks, from the Blueshirts and the Nazis.

Deirdre, I respect your right to have an opinion on this. Whether it is appropriate to make criticisms of Dan Keating when he is just dead is a good point. What provoked me to do so was that his death is being used for political purposes by RSF - in essence, to advocate the message that his brand of militant, armed struggle was as appropriate now as in 1916 or 1920, and that his example is one the new generation should emulate. It would be, in my view, wrong to let this message pass unchallenged.

I think Keating's obstinate clinging to this view was pernicious - he advocated a struggle that could not be won, and in defiance of the actual expressed wishes of the Irish people. While advocating Irish soveresignty, he judged that he had the right not to give the Irish people a voice on the means as well as the ends. Were people to take his views seriously, it would mean that any half dozen young people equipped with a few pistols would be justified and encouraged to wage an unwinnable war on the British state, in the name of sacrifice. I have known many who did just that. Some are dead. Some spent their best years in jail. My desire to raise my voice in protest, and contribute to an awareness that will prevent others doing the same, over-rides the normal duty of respect for the dead in this instance. It is the living that we must worry about the most. Keating's tradition is a disaster; if it passes with him, so much the better.

"What provoked me to do so was that his death is being used for political purposes by RSF - in essence, to advocate the message that his brand of militant, armed struggle was as appropriate now as in 1916 or 1920, and that his example is one the new generation should emulate. It would be, in my view, wrong to let this message pass unchallenged."

You're entitled to challenge the RSF position - I would feel very inclined to do so myself. However, let's be realistic: when an old Republican dies, people in that tradition commemorate him and say good things about him (it's usually a he, unfortunately, as I'm sure there are many female Republicans whose deaths never get noted). This is part of Irish culture, and given that we're a relatively new political entity in the larger scheme of things, perfectly understandable and correct. It's debatable whether that qualifies as using Keating's death for political purposes, but if it does, then RSF wouldn't be the first to do it. Would you criticise Fine Gael for doing the same, if they did it? (Having said that, though I'd accuse Fine Gael of many things, I wouldn't accuse them of that.) Probably not.

Given the tone of your previous posting, I can't help pointing out that that in 1916, it took the executions of most of the leaders for the vast majority of the population to support their position. The public can be fickle, and certainly Irish political culture and activism can be extremely fickle to this day: it often prefers martyrdom to the éclat of a great outcome or moral victory. It's one of the more regrettable aspects of the Irish political temperament, probably a carry-over from colonialism. While I may not agree with RSF on matters of methodology and their appropriateness in the Ireland of today, I don't think your analysis is particularly complex, Observer, and can't help thinking you would been the first to have badmouthed the men and women of 1916.

You also make the statement:
"My desire to raise my voice in protest, and contribute to an awareness that will prevent others doing the same, over-rides the normal duty of respect for the dead in this instance."

You're being a little disingenuous here - firstly, because if you're so determined to raise your voice, as you so eloquently put it, then posting under a pseudonyn spoils any good intentions you may have, given that nobody knows whose voice it is. You could be Ian Paisley for all anybody knows, or indeed Kevin Myers!

You seem like a fairly intelligent person, but you don't know much about human psychology. If I were an idealistic 22-year-old thinking of entering into armed struggle against the British (and admittedly, I'm neither 22 nor thinking of that course of action), not only would your comments fail to prevent me from doing so, they would probably confirm my resolve. This would be precisely because you ignore the 'normal duty of respect for the dead'. Keating isn't even cold in his grave and you're saying he had 'a wasted life'. I didn't know Keating, though I knew of him very well, but I know how I'd feel if someone said similarly about my grandfather because they disagreed with the political choices he made. For that reason and others, I think both Dan Keating and his family deserve better. Who would listen to the opinions of someone with such lack of respect for previous generations? It's true that we need to be concerned about the living, but in honouring the dead, we do so. There's no contradiction there.

Deirdre, you are very eloquent and I respect the way you argue your case. You might be right that in putting my view in the context of this man's death it is unlikely to influence anyone.

My answer, though I concede it may be neither perfect nor convincing to you, is that I grew up in the North at the height of the troubles. I even got marginally involved myself at one point. I certainly ,as of course did many who proceed to draw different conclusions, witnessed a great deal of pointless death, destruction and sacrifice. It upsets me greatly. I am horrified at the thought that others might be swayed by the eulogising of Dan Keating to embark on courses of action which all experience shows lead nowhere.

You raise 1916 and suggest I might be among the first to badmouth the men of that era, who acted without majority support as well. Well, Deirdre, I am not discussing 1916: I am discussing Ireland in the year 2007. We could debate 1916 endlessly - it is very difficult to draw accurate historical paralells. All I will say is that, Republicans of the RSF mould continue to insist that they have the right to wage a war in defiance of the wishes of tthe Irish people, and of course draw on the example of 1916 to support their case - whether that justification is correct is another issue entirely. I do not give them that right. But please consider - even if we have a right, it does not mean that we are duty bound to exercise it. I might have the 'right' to jump off the nearest high building - it does not mean that it is sensible to exercise it.

What I continue to object to about Dan Keating is that he and his kind urge people to do precisely this - to wage a war which, in the year 2007, we have enough experiuence to know cannot and never will succeed. No armed minority can successfully pursue a war in the modern world, in the face of the intense, committed oppoition of the people it is nominally attempting to liberate. Even if we grant that they have the right to do so, this does not mean they can win. It does not mean that exercising this right makes sense. It does not mean it is appopriate in 2007. It is pointless, destructive, a waste of life and energy. You seem to be opposed to 'war' yourself: Dan Keating, I feel, would have argued differently, as does RSF here today.

A fine funeral for a great man. Sinn Féin President, Ruairí Ó Brádaigh gave an outstanding oration, as befit the occasion. At the end he couldnt hold back the tears. It was very touching to see a living legend of the Irish nation show his true heart at the passing of a legendary comrade. The sun shone down on Dan and his beloved Kerry looked very beautiful on this sad, but also joyous occasion. Joyous, in the celebration of Dan's extraordinary life of service to the Irish nation. Na Fianna Éireann did Dan proud, as did the lone piper. Wreaths were laid on the behalf of the Republican Movement and the National Graves Association. Dan would have been particularly proud that a wreath was laid on the behalf of our POWs, who are faoi ghlas ag Gallaibh, particularly since Dan spent so much time in enemy Consentration Camps himself because of his love for Ireland and the Irish people.

The free state police, thankfully, did not make a nuisance of themselves.

Its good to see Sir Anthony allow a De Valera enthusiast write in his paper.

But we live in changing times. Yesterday the Irish Examiner called for an end to political divisions dating back to the Civil War.

And the current leader of the Rearguard Legion, Bertie Ahern, appointed the Unionist Leninist, Eoghan Harris, to An Seanad. And Senator Harris in an address to his Unionist brothers ( and a few sisters) calls for Unionist unity. ( and in today's Independent the Senator, with his usual wit, berates the Media for neglecting his historic address). And soon the leader of Unionism, Dr. Ian Paisley, will celebrate in Dublin, the greatest of all Unionist leaders, Sir Edward Carson.

When his friend, Albert Reynolds, signed the Downing Street Declaration, O Gadhra wrote that the political landscape had changed utterly. And it had. It marked the acceptance by Fianna Fail that Irish self-determination could only be exercised with Unionist permission.
Are things changing changing utterly once again? Certainly boundaries are being blurred and the constitutional and political relation of Ireland to England is being altered. Should Dan Keating have followed De Valera on the path now accepted by Sir Anthony's boys Harris and O Gadhra? More likely, Dan, after a century of authentic living would in true Kerry manner talk about pipers and tunes.

The dignity displayed by Dan Keating throughout his life and the lack of the most basic dignity the bleating anonymous bedwetters such as observer display ( anonymous as in their political background too ) is something very apparent in this thread .
Thats why people like Dan Keating will continue to inspire Irishmen and women in every generation and why scummy comments will only come from anonymous , undignified grave-jiggers .